Talk:List of Formula One driver records/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Average Points per Race

There are 2 columns in that table, one for the entire career of a driver, and one that stops counting at the end of the 2009 season because of the massive change in the points system. It has been suggested that the pre-2010 column is original research, and I have 2 thoughts about this:

• it ain't original research, it's simple math. The total number of races and total number of points for each driver are available on their respective wiki page, and for those drivers whose career spanned both point systems, their career results can be perused, again on their respective wiki page, their points and race totals being added up.
• if the pre-2010 column is original research, then so are most of the tables on that page. Indeed, the only stats that are reported on a driver's wiki page and would therefore not involve any kind of looking anything up or using any kind of math, are total starts, total victories, total podiums, total pole positions, total fastest laps, and total number of championships. If we want to be strict about it, all the tables that are of the flavour of "in one season", "consecutive", "with the same team", "without a <fill-in-the-blank>", "youngest", "oldest", etc would be original research also, since they all involve way more math and reading than the pre-2010 points per race column.

So, what do we do? What is our standard for original research? Real tlhingan (talk) 20:09, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

This not some sort of arbitrary standard. WP:ORIGINAL RESEARCH is a core policy and we have to adhere to that. All material must be attributable to reliable, published sources. Doing our own "simple math" is therefor unacceptable. I agree with you that this list is currently in a poor state and needs much more sources and the removal of more original research. That doesn't justify adding more unsourced, original research content.Tvx1 20:50, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Tvx1, you are making some valid points, but simple arithmetic is not considered original research (see WP:CALC and Wikipedia:About Valid Routine Calculations). There does need to be source attribution of a few things for this to be valid here, the principal two being the actual numbers used in the calculation and the justification for the calculation (in this case the claim that the points system change makes things "problematic"). However, once the basic numbers and the rationale for making the calculation have been sourced, the "numerical summarization" is fine. You don't need to find a source that gives the number itself. However, the list needs far more sources to support the inclusion of particular statistics, mostly to establish the notability of any particular stat as there are some deeply trivial data in this list. Pyrope 22:10, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Pyrope, which stats would you consider trivial? The F1 winter hiatus is, in my opinion, the best time the clean-up this list before everybody gets crazy with timely updates in March. Real tlhingan (talk) 22:17, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Pyrope, I never wrote it should be attributed; I wrote it should be attributable to reliable, published sources per the policy. I don't think we can reasonably assume a published sourced on "average points scored per grand prix prior to 2010" to exist, which is why I think this is original research. That's why in this case I think it should be supported with a source before considering inclusion. Additionally, I'm not convinced that calculating averages falls under simple arithmetic. Tvx1 23:52, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Attributed/attributable, what's the real difference? Either way you are requesting that the number itself exist outside of Wikipedia. What you need is some evidence that the change in points scoring schemes makes comparisons across the full span of F1 history problematic (justifying the calculation) and reliable sources for the fundamental data (justifying the numbers used). I would then be happy that the calculation is a "reasonable reflection of the sources" (the actual wording of the policy). I'm not asking for anything to be "assumed", I'm saying we need an actual source for the assumption made in the Wikinote (which should be an explanatory footnote or introductory statement, not hidden to the readers). A mean is an elementary calculation using only the basic operators ×, ÷, + and −, so yes, it's simple. As far as triviality goes, any group of stats for which there isn't any evidence of use in reliable, third-party sources would be likely. Pyrope 00:24, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

I think I originally split the table when they moved to the 25... points system. At the time that made sense as it gave a snapshot of that point in time. Now I think it looks increasingly clunky, and inevitably, the drivers who retired on 10 points will drop out of the table anyway. I would rather just either drop it altogether or have a separate static table which shows the positions as they were at the time 25 points came in. The idea that this is OR doesn't stack up - you don't have to have a source which states an ongoing position for every point of time - if someone was born in 1966 you don't need a source to say they were 50 in 2016 - in fact someone's age is always a calculation. It would be OR to work out what Fangio's average points would have been if the 25 system was applied to his results, but you don't need a source to divide his career points (citable) by his starts (citable) or even do this for, say a particular season. Btljs (talk) 07:26, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Most wins in a season table

I know that the design of this table is trying to minimise clutter, but it's not good design the way it's got multiple merged rows. In particular, spreading Lewis Hamilton over two separate positions in the table with three entries. Then the number of races in the season and averages have different merges - it's a mess. I would put number of wins first and merge and a driver's name only within those positions. All the other columns I think should repeat. Btljs (talk) 07:39, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Sometimes, people just go overboard with merging things. I agree, you should only merge entries within a same subdivision, otherwise it gets difficult to line things up when you read. I tweaked it, go have a look. Real tlhingan (talk) 19:23, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Protection from Edits from Unregistered users

There are new editors on this page for this season, and that is a good thing. However, I have found the edits to be of very poor quality, with:

• people only updating some but not all columns in a table
• people only updating some but not all drivers in a table
• people changing starts to entries and vice versa
• people clicking edit at the top of the document instead of the specific section they are updating, making vetting the changes a royal pain.

Can we restrict edits to registered users, so as to at least force these new editors to register, and then we can have a discussion with them.Real tlhingan (talk) 21:41, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Formula One driver records. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060113144308/http://www.chicanef1.dyndns.org/records.pl to http://chicanef1.dyndns.org/records.pl

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:20, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Wins from farthest back on the starting grid

Number 8 on this list, Fernando Alonso was found to have benefited by the deliberate cheating of his team. As a result I don't think his victory should be listed in this table. Nathaniel73 (talk) 16:07, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

The sport still considers his and Renault's win still valid (now matter how ununderstandable I consider that myself as well), so we have no option but to list it.Tvx1 16:34, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

As Tvx1 mentioned, we go by the official results. Should the FIA revisit the issue and reclassify Alonso, we would change it at that time. Similarly, Andrea de Cesaris was excluded from the 1983 Brazilian Grand Prix after finishing 2nd, and the FIA did not reclassify the drivers that came after him. The official classification of the 1983 German GP does not have anybody listed in 2nd place, and that's what we use. Real tlhingan (talk) 17:09, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Why is this record even listed? It is surely far too trivial for wikipedia? --Falcadore (talk) 10:46, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Agree.Tvx1 11:08, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Racing enthusiasts tend to enjoy "last-to-first" charges through the field. I remember Rubens Barrichello's first win in Formula 1, he started 18th and slowly made his way through the field in a wet race, and he cried on the podium. If y'all want to talk about trivial records, every single one of us could come up with a list and I can pretty much guarantee that every single record on this wiki page will be listed, simply because different people like F1 for different reasons. The records I personally think are trivial are the laps led and career points. Laps led don't matter, only the last lap led in a given race gets rewarded with a win, and for career points, the scoring system has changed way too much over the years, not only for the amount of points awarded, but the number of positions that score points as well. Because of that, lot of the greats aren't in the career points (or even season point) categories. Real tlhingan (talk) 22:30, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't for racing enthusiasts. The Formula 1 Wiki is. So put it there. --Falcadore (talk) 11:56, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Acid test: is it reported in non-specialist media? I imagine it would be as you don't have to be a racing enthusiast to understand coming from behind - a concept common to many sports. Btljs (talk) 14:47, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Is it reported at all? I doubt it. A large part of this article seems to be a mirror of StatsF1, a specialist F1 statistics site, which we are not.Tvx1 21:09, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

StatsF1 has errors in their data. The data on Wikipedia has been vetted, audited, checked and corrected by the community. Real tlhingan (talk) 17:50, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

That's not the points. The points is that majority of these so-called "records" are only listed on dedicated sites like statsF1 and not in mainstream sources.Tvx1 19:18, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

StatsF1 has errors in their data. The data on Wikipedia has been vetted, audited, checked and corrected by the community. That makes it Original research and thus should be deleted. --Falcadore (talk) 23:26, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

I disagree. Adding up stuff correctly from reliable sources isn't original research. Building a time machine to go watch the race live to get the information first hand, now that would be original research.Real tlhingan (talk) 02:11, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

No, adding up stuff ourselves and publishing it here as an alleged record is quite vehemently original research. As it stands, StatsF1 is used as source 43 times in this articles. So I question have these 43 stats been credited in mainstream sources as official records or are they only mentioned on a dedicated stats site. If it's the latter a number of them/they should be removed. Wikipedia is not a stats site for f1 or even general racing enthusiasts.Tvx1 10:44, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Masahiro_Hasemi information contradicted elsewhere on wkipedia

The "Percentage fastest laps" table may be incorrect.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masahiro_Hasemi#Complete_Formula_One_results

States that his fastest lap record was due to a timing error later corrected by the organisers of the Japanese GP.

Yes, it's a tricky one. Reliable sources are split on the issue - FORIX credits fastest lap at the 1976 Japanese GP to Laffite/Ligier, whereas formula1.com, ChicaneF1, StatsF1 and others credit it to Hasemi/Kojima. Currently, all the relevant Wikipedia articles (i.e. this one, Masahiro Hasemi, Kojima Engineering, 1976 Japanese Grand Prix and 1976 Formula One season) credit it to Hasemi/Kojima, but most have an explanatory footnote. DH85868993 (talk) 12:14, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Update: Hasemi was removed from the table in November 2016, per this discussion. DH85868993 (talk) 04:15, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Clark's 1965 Grand Slams

Race 1 South African Grand Prix, Race 4 French Grand Prix and Race 7 German Grand Prix. None of these are consecutive. Graham Hill got the fastest lap in the 1965 British Grand Prix. Sometimes if wrong information is on a page for a long time it can be mistaken for correct information. Mobile mundo (talk) 22:06, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Trivial "records"

Real tlhingan, I don't know why you keep enforcing this trivial achievement on this article. It was added earlier today by some IP and it's pure trivial. DH85868993 removed more trivial records as of lately and I think this a good of course of action. The sources you use just mention the drivers in question achieved their first pole. Which is pretty logical. They don't however mention the amount of attempts it took them to get there. You're just enforcing it on your personal valuing of this achievement.Tvx1 21:34, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Just to clarify, I haven't been "removing trivial records" - I've only been updating the TOC after other editors have added or removed tables. DH85868993 (talk) 22:29, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes I removed some trivia, DH cleaned up after me! QueenCake (talk) 00:01, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Indeed. Sorry for the mix-up.Tvx1 15:33, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

All records are trivial, really. Records don't win races and records don't give you two-tenth of a second advantage on your lap time. Formula 1 is always changing and always evolving, as a consequence there's records on here that have become completely irrelevant. "World Champion With Fewest Points," for example, with the new scoring system introduced in 2010, makes this record completely irrelevant. Phil Hill won the WDC with 98 career points while Sergio Perez got 100 points just this year, yet he's never won a race, never sat on pole and definitely never came close to a WDC. All records are trivial. Full stop.Real tlhingan (talk) 23:18, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Maybe they are to some degree, but proper records can be verified by reliable sources. Those that cannot are not records but trivial statistics, often made up by the editors who add them. Wikipedia is not the place for random statistics, and any record that an editor has thought up and calculated by themselves is original research and prohibited. QueenCake (talk) 00:01, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

We have 4 months before the next season starts and regular edits start flooding in. Let's all of us spend a little time looking for legit sources for these. We can also have a discussion about what kinds of records we want on this page and which kind we don't want.Real tlhingan (talk) 00:35, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

That's the whole point, we don't decide what we want and wan't at all. The sources dictate us which ones are properly credited records and which one are trivial statistics. So the one that have to go are very simple:

• Statistics which don't have any source and for which no sources can be found.
• Statistics which are only listed on dedicated stats sites like StatsF1.

I have already mentioned in a previous section that for to many of these so-called "records" are merely copied from StatsF1. Wikipedia is not a stats site and certainly should not be a mirror of one.Tvx1 15:33, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

And if anything, the discussion on what is and is not a record, and what should subsequently be included, has played out multiple times before. Real tlhingan, just take a look through the archives of this talk page, and there are multiple examples of trivial records, explanations of why that breaks the rules, and a firm position that anything an editor collates by themselves is clearly original research.

Several years ago, this article was starting to balloon out of control. People were constantly adding more trivia - including things far more egregious than under discussion now - without any references or indication that it wasn't made up on the spot. We managed to stem the flow, remove the most obvious offences, and generally require new additions to be referenced. Taking stock, I think it is past time we move towards a serious purge of existing unsupported content. QueenCake (talk) 17:44, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

I wholeheartedly agree with that. Moreover, I think that not only unsourced self-calculated statistics should be removed, but I think that statistics which are only listed on dedicated stats sites should be removed as well.Tvx1 18:33, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

That's reasonable. However, I notice some definite records (i.e most wins) are only sourced to StatsF1, which obviously should be referenced instead of removed. QueenCake (talk) 21:22, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Reason for "Win without pole" statistic

The reason for the statistic is that I was searching for the drivers that have high win rates in races while not being on pole. Some drivers have a very fast one lap that get them to pole, which can give an early advantage. Other drivers do not necessary have the one lap top speed to be on pole, but are more consistent in a race to be able win it. After a internet search I noted that other sites report this statistic, but this Wikipedia page did not. This is a useful and valid addition. (I hope this reason can be found. Unfortunately the "Edit Summery cannot be re-edited to include a reference to this reason.) PierreRudolph (talk) 10:02, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

That is makes it sound very much like WP:Original research. Wikipedia is not a repository for statistics you like. You should take that information to the Formula One Wikia rather than here. Wikipedia is a general purpose encyclopedia not a Formula One fan site.

Bring some citations about how this is a statistic in regular use by secondary sources.

We really should have strict limits on double intersection statistics. --Falcadore (talk) 16:52, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

You are getting a bit pointed and personal. The "Formula One Fan" argument is off topic. The discussion is about the validity of the information in the edit. I can also put the argument back at you and say that Wikipedia is not just for a small group of friends to only allow information that they like. It seems there is a small group that only allow their own edits on this page and delete contributions from anybody else. (That is against Wikipedia principles.)

My edit had a clear reason (described earlier), is not a copy-right infringement. It is comparable in value and especially style to any of the other edits on the page and uses a reference that is used by many other entries on this same page.

I have put a reasonable argument forward. The replies were not reasonable and even contained veiled personal attacks that were off topic. I don't mean to be rude, but this discussion is not making progress. I am submitting this edit now for conflict resolution to Wikipedia. PierreRudolph (talk) 07:00, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

But the statistic is not notable - the primary reason for wikipedia inclusion. You need to prove the statistic is notable. You have done nothing to achieve this. You claim of the statistic being "comparable in value" highlights here as you have not made any attempt to establish this in any way beyond your own personal point of view. Pointing to the StatsF1 website as a justification is no justification at all because StatsF1 make no claim to the statistics notability either. It would help considerably if you can find some examples of this statistic being used by professional motorsport publications.

Can you prove the statistic is notable? This page can help.

Specifically I think WP:INDISCRIMINATE applies here. Particularly the bit about where it says Excessive listings of unexplained statistics appears tailor made for this topic.

Threats of submission for conflict resolution after only one reversion by myself and two response from yourself will see your submission quickly sent back to talk page discussion for further debate I feel sure.

You claim my actions to be personal and I reject that on the simple basis that you have not established notability. That is clearly not subjective. --Falcadore (talk) 02:56, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Fastest Lap Point Record

Should we start to add this here as it is a new feature from this year? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.132.15.81 (talk) 12:38, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

I'm not convinced it's necessary. But if it is added, it should also include drivers who scored points for fastest lap from 1950-1959. DH85868993 (talk) 10:37, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

And it needs a source to show that it is not WP:OR Ian Dalziel (talk) 14:06, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

No. It's not up to us to create record. We merely report official records as published in reliable sources. This page already includes too many trivial stats as it stands.Tvx1 18:35, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Most Grand Prix wins by drivers that have not won a World Championship

Mark Webber is listed however he won a championship in 2015. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grahaml35 (talk • contribs) 03:14, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

@Grahaml35: This is F1 records, not motorsport records. The "World Championship" here refers to the F1 World Championship and Webber never won one. ^{Babymissfortune} 05:54, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

You are correct, my apologies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grahaml35 (talk • contribs) 06:02, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Drivers' Championships won with most constructors

Hello, Might I suggest that this statistic is given more prominence? My view is that it is one Lewis Hamilton will want to take from the current holder. Hamilton currently has five championships with two constructors and is likely to be trying to beat Michael Schumacher's seven titles. I predict he will aim for the eighth and ninth with a third constructor thus making his overall record almost untouchable — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.134.55.134 (talk) 09:48, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

I would consider such a change unnecessary for several reason. Firstly we don't order there records by if a current driver is close to breaking it. Secondly he isn't close to breaking it at all, the record is 4 held by Fangio, Hamilton's only won titles with 2 constructors, Thirdly justify the move based on speculation which isn't widly held isn't in line with Wikipedia's policies and finally this record is where it is because there are limited referecnes to it in sources, therefore it isn't considered a very notable record. Therefore I see no reason to move it. SSSB (talk) 10:45, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

needs a contents page

scrolling through dozens of records to find the specific thing you're looking for is boring 92.17.144.186 (talk) 19:59, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

That’s why we have the table of contents.Tvx1 01:24, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Consecutive Drivers Championships

On the record table for the most consecutive Driver's Championships, the table needs updating. Lewis Hamilton should have 3, since he won in 2017, 2018 and 2019. I would do it myself but I don't know how the table formatting works and I don't want to mess it up.

Achilles' Wrath (talk) 18:21, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

@Achilles' Wrath: he is shown with 3 - List of Formula One driver records#Most consecutive championships
SSSB (talk) 19:09, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

@SSSB: oops, sorry...I didn't see that. sorry for wasting your time.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.244.37.172 (talk) 19:10, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Wins should be first in the list

Number of races entered is a participation trophy. It should come after the number of wins. It is less important than poles or even fastest laps. Would edit but don't want to mess up any automation that might be here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.20.156.67 (talk) 17:15, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Most wins record holder

I've taken the liberty of adding a list containing the most wins record holder per season. If this is not the right place, feel free to move it. Lustigson (talk) 10:38, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

I've copyeditied it. Listing a year by year progression makes for a unnecessary long table.
SSSB (talk) 11:24, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! Lustigson (talk) 11:25, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Hamilton percentage for 2020

List of Formula One driver records#Most wins in a season gives Hamilton as 11/15 whereas List of Formula One driver records#Highest percentage of wins in a season gives 11/17. Obviously it cannot possibly be 17 unless I've been in a coma and missed Abu Dhabi, but should it be out of 15 or 16? Moreover, if HAM wins in Abu Dhabi, should it read 12/17 or 12/16? Equally, if HAM races and doesn't win, is it 11/17 or 11/16, and if Hamilton doesn't race is it 11/15 or 11/17? Spa-Franks (talk) 02:24, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

My understanding is that in the "Highest percentage of xxx in a season" tables, we usually use the total number of races in the season (i.e. 17 in this case). Otherwise (if we used the number of races to date), then after the first race of the season, each table would have a driver with a percentage of 100%, which seems a bit misleading. DH85868993 (talk) 08:41, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Agree, with the same reasoning.
SSSB (talk) 10:00, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

But is it on number of entries (or starts, take your pick) per driver, or number of races in a season? Spa-Franks (talk) 18:16, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Races per season. Otherwise Johnnie Parsons would be on 100% for wins in 1950 etc..
SSSB (talk) 18:53, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Perez and Mercedes engine

Why is Perez's races during 2019-2020 included in the record "Most races with a single engine manufacturer"? Technically, BWT Mercedes is different from Mercedes. The ref itself doesn't include these two years to his races with Mercedes engine. We also treat them as two separate engines at Formula One engines, just like what we do to Renault and TAG Heuer during the past few years. ^{Engr. Smitty Werben} 04:28, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

I've removed the row (it was only added after the Sakhir Grand Prix). DH85868993 (talk) 06:11, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Hamilton race entries/starts?

The lists currently have 270 race entries overall for Hamilton, 269 race starts overall, and 269 starts and entries with a Mercedes engine - is the 270 race entries overall number incorrect, or some/all of the others? 188.31.70.225 (talk) 14:55, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

The ones that read 269 hadn't been updated for 2021 ESP GP.
SSSB (talk) 19:58, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Markus Winkelhock

List_of_Formula_One_driver_records#For_at_least_one_lap,_percentage_of_races

As much as I like the WinkelROCK meme, it seems weird to include drivers with only 1 or 2 race starts on a list like this — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tdp2612 (talk • contribs) 17:39, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Yes, it does. But he holds the record. Of course, we could redefine the table to include only drivers with at least a certain number of starts...? SSSB (talk) 11:43, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

I'm not in favour of applying a number of starts/entries threshold to the tables in this article. I prefer to just present the raw data and let the reader decide for themselves the merits of achievements by drivers who only have a handful of starts. (I'm aware that we have a threshold of at least 15 entries for the "Highest percentage of points-scoring races" table; if it was up to me that table wouldn't have that restriction). DH85868993 (talk) 09:04, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Most consecutive race finishes without scoring points

Hi, I was thinking that the subject might be a curious addition to the 'lesser' records list. The driver at the top of the list will have shown remarkable reliability whilst never having been at the pointy end of the field. What do you think? (Pretty sure this record does not yet exist on the list, or does it?) 120.16.27.112 (talk) 11:42, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Have you a source to establish notability? Ian Dalziel (talk) 11:45, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

No. I wasn't thinking of any particular driver either. I just wondered if it would be a notable inclusion (for the reason I give) to the list. I wouldn't even know where to start looking to find who would be at the top of the list (other than scores & scores of historic results). I'll google it & see what I can find. Maybe someone has a list somewhere already. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.16.27.112 (talk) 11:51, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Had a quick look but all I could find was most race starts without scoring points (which already has a record holder). Possible drivers to have the 'Most consecutive race finishes without scoring points' could include Luca Badoer, Charles Pic, Max Chilton, Brett Lunger or Tora Takagi. It would take some research to find the top of this list ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.16.27.112 (talk) 12:13, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Alternatively you could also have the most race finishes without scoring points, which isn't on the list either. It shows great reliability without the driver ever threatening the leaders. Also, the main records are all geared around most points, etc. whilst the two records I propose is the opposite of that but at the same time showing reliability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.16.27.112 (talk) 12:35, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Most Consecutive Fastest Laps

@Engr. Smitty I saw your revert of User:12.145.208.93's Most consecutive fastest laps[1]. While f1.fandom.com is not a reliable source f1stats.com does have the same list at https://www.statsf1.com/en/statistiques/pilote/meilleurtour/consecutif.aspx

Do you think we should keep the stats with the correct list. I don't know how we would cap it to 10 though as the record for 3 consecutive laps in a row is shared by 27 drivers. Reshadp (talk) 17:49, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

@Reshadp The main question here is do we really need to add that record here? As what Tvx1 said above, ... we should simply do away with the arbitrary or unimportant records. Wikipedia is not an F1 fanpage. ^{Engr. Smitty Werben} 18:12, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Fair enough, that makes sense.

Thanks. Reshadp (talk) 18:16, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

FYI, I've changed the source to StatsF1 and added a wikinote explaining why the table only goes down to =4th/4 consecutive fastest laps. DH85868993 (talk) 23:34, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Youngest world champion - quadruple

Given the litany of totally nerdy tables on this page not having a table for youngest driver to get their 4th world championship is a major omission. Such a table is far more important an achievement than who went the most laps before scoring a point. Would argue that youngest 5th world championship winner should also be in the article. Also the order of the tables is completely nonsensical. The average person with an interest in F1 is looking for wdc related records so all those tables should be at the top of the page well before the nerd stuff only the most obsessed F1 fan cases about 2A00:23EE:1878:917A:545F:9DFF:FEE4:BA85 (talk) 07:28, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Possible split?

As it stands, this page is very, very long. It's presently 220kb; that's larger than many medium-resolution photographs.

Not only that, but the page has many records that are, shall we say, arbitrary or unimportant, like the aforementioned "For at least one lap, percentage of races" record. I have a feeling most people visiting this page would rather know the most wins between drivers or other similar major records as opposed to these more trivial ones.

The more important records could go to a separate, protected page, which would also discourage particularly rampant vandalism from a certain driver's fanbase, with a more detailed list elsewhere. That, or make a series of pages pertaining to one particular aspect of Formula 1, such as starts and finishes. 194.207.183.182 (talk) 09:54, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

On the contrary, we should simply do away with the arbitrary or unimportant records. Wikipedia is not an F1 fanpage.Tvx1 11:43, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

I would support that change. The first thing that struck me about this page was the litany of totally useless and unimportant "records" that nobody but the most obsessed F1 fan would care about. Especially as those tables are appearing before far more important records. 2A00:23EE:1878:917A:545F:9DFF:FEE4:BA85 (talk) 07:32, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Recent additions

What do we think about the following recently-added tables?:

• Most wins in a championship-winning season
• Most race wins in one season without becoming World Champion

(replacing the existing "Most wins in a season" table)

• Most pole positions in a championship-winning season
• Most pole positions in a non championship-winning season

(replacing the existing "Most pole positions in a season" table)

• Most podium finishes in a championship-winning season
• Most podium finishes in a season without becoming World Champion

(replacing the existing "Most podium finishes in a season" table)

• Most fastest laps in a World Championship season
• Most fastest laps in one season without becoming World Champion

(replacing the existing "Most fastest laps in a season" table)

• Fewest fastest laps in a World Championship season
• Fewest wins in a championship-winning season (added in two places, replacing a single line in the "Other driver records" section)
• Fewest pole positions scored in a Championship-winning season (replacing a single line in the "Other driver records" section)
• Most races left in the season when becoming World Champion (replacing a single line in the "Other driver records" section)
• Pole positions at most different circuits of a same country (replacing a single line in the "Other driver records" section)
• Wins at most different circuits in the same country (replacing a single line in the "Other driver records" section)

Personally I think they're excessive, per WP:NOTSTATS and the changes should be reverted. Pinging College2021 who added the tables. DH85868993 (talk) 22:59, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

This page is slowly becoming a statsf1.com duplicate. ^{Engr. Smitty Werben} 23:10, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

For info, the same editor has made similar changes to List of Formula One constructor records (i.e. splitting existing tables into "in a championship-winning season" and "in a non-championship-winning season" tables). DH85868993 (talk) 03:19, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

I'm really not in favour of existing tables being split into "in a championship-winning season" and "in a non-championship-winning season" variants. I don't know of any reliable source that makes that distinction. Plus most of the tables which have been split already indicated whether or not the driver won the championship, via the "WDC" column. DH85868993 (talk) 03:34, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Agree they're egregious and unnecessary 2A00:23EE:1878:917A:545F:9DFF:FEE4:BA85 (talk) 07:35, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

@DH85868993 I say just boldly revert everything the user has added. They don't even want to discuss it in here. Let's also add Template:Dynamic list to tell the people that not every record his added here, only the important/notable ones. However, it might be too much work now because of the edit conflicts that have arisen. ^{Engr. Smitty Werben} 15:55, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Most points without a win

It makes no sense to compare different eras with different points given. If you want to compare scientifically correct, you need to have a common point basis. Useless at this point. 37.201.240.0 (talk) 08:47, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Most wins in first championship season - sprint races

If a driver wins a sprint race in their first championship season (as Oscar Piastri has just done), should this count for the "Most wins in first championship season" statistic? If not, should a footnote be added regarding this? A Doctor Who (talk) 22:11, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

@A Doctor Who The question is, is it really that notable enough to be added here in the article? ^{Engr. Smitty Werben} 23:28, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

I believe that, due to the existence of the "Most sprint wins" statistic and the note regarding Bruce McLaren, Oscar Piastri at minimum deserves a note regarding it (and if a future driver also wins a sprint but not a race during their first championship season, they should be put in the same note).

It would probably be something similar to "Note: Oscar Piastri won the sprint at the 2023 Qatar Grand Prix, but has yet to win a race in his first championship season." with "has yet to" changed to "did not" if he does not win a race during before the end of the season - though it would be better phrased, as the distinction between a sprint and the final race seems unclear to me. For example, an article on the Formula 1 website from 2021[2] calls the event "F1 Sprint" (specifically not calling it a race in the title) while also stating "F1 Sprint will be a race".

I understand if you believe that this is not notable enough to be added to the article, though - you definitely have a much better understanding of this than I do. A Doctor Who (talk) 00:52, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

He is literally the only one who won a sprint in their first season, in just the third season the concept exists. There is no “most” here. Including this would be undue. Tvx1 13:28, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Most pole positions in a season

Verstappen just got his 11th for 2023. It was probably on the "to do" list to add in but just giving you a reminder anyways.. lol 120.16.112.93 (talk) 17:54, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

@120.16.112.93: By convention, the entire article is updated following the Grand Prix. DH85868993 (talk) 21:59, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

OK, I wasn't aware of that. I don't think it's a hard & fast convention as I have seen updates added before the weekend is over. Either way, it will get amended when it gets amended ;-) 120.16.15.101 (talk) 16:23, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Most consecutive race entries vs Most consecutive race starts

Hi, it seems to me the above 2 tables are out of sync. To follow what has gone before, as in, for example, Total Race Entries vs Total Race Starts, Entries should always proceed Starts. You might want to swap 'Most consecutive race entries' around with 'Most consecutive race starts', for consistency. I would do it myself but I don't know how to do that stuff. Thanks heaps 120.16.32.192 (talk) 22:24, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

 Done I've swapped the order. DH85868993 (talk) 23:54, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Cheers 120.16.115.2 (talk) 19:44, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

most consecutive points finishes

In the list for most consecutive points finishes it says Hamilton has an ongoing 22 race streak. But didn't he retire in Qatar? 2003:C8:CF25:B01:4C13:F442:FF62:C4B6 (talk) 15:49, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

He retired from the Grand Prix but he scored points in the sprint. In this article, a driver is credited with a "points finish" if they score points in either the sprint or the Grand Prix. This is the principle employed by StatsF1, which is used as the source for most of the "points" tables in this article. DH85868993 (talk) 01:44, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Hamilton 998/1008

There's been some to and fro recently over how many points Hamilton scored between the 2018 British GP and the 2020 Bahrain GP. I get 1008 as follows:

Extended content

2018 GBR: 18 2018 GER: 25 2018 HUN: 25 2018 BEL: 18 2018 ITA: 25 2018 SIN: 25 2018 RUS: 25 2018 JPN: 25 2018 USA: 15 2018 MEX: 12 2018 BRA: 25 2018 ABU: 25 2019 AUS: 18 2019 BHR: 25 2019 CHN: 25 2019 AZE: 18 2019 ESP: 26 2019 MON: 25 2019 CAN: 25 2019 FRA: 25 2019 AUT: 10 2019 GBR: 26 2019 GER: 2 2019 HUN: 25 2019 BEL: 18 2019 ITA: 16 2019 SIN: 12 2019 RUS: 26 2019 JPN: 16 2019 MEX: 25 2019 USA: 18 2019 BRA: 6 2019 ABU: 26 2020 AUT: 12 2020 STY: 25 2020 HUN: 26 2020 GBR: 25 2020 70A: 19 2020 ESP: 25 2020 BEL: 25 2020 ITA: 7 2020 TUS: 26 2020 RUS: 15 2020 EIF: 25 2020 POR: 26 2020 EMI: 26 2020 TUR: 25 2020 BHR: 25 Total: 1008

Please advise of any errors. DH85868993 (talk) 02:48, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Simpler like this: 2018 points + 2019 points + 2020 points = (408 - 145) + 413 + 332 = 1008 --0chn9 (talk) 14:21, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

@DH85868993 perhaps it would be useful to clarify the note that accompanies it? Because now it says "including sprint points" while sprint races were only introduced a year later...? Greetings RuedNL2 (talk) 18:05, 3 March 2024 (UTC)